High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeExt.P19 set aside; matter remanded for fresh co...

WP(C) Nos. 24184 of 2023 & 8247 of 2024

Case / Petition Number:WP(C) No. 24184 of 2023 and WP(C) No. 8247 of 2024

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • Viju Abraham
Judgment Date
2024-04-04
Court Decision / Holding
Ext.P19 is set aside; the 1st respondent is directed to reconsider the matter after taking Ext.P20 into account, affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and respondents 3 to 5, and to pass a fresh decision within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. The interim order in WP(C) 8247 dated 01.03.2024 will remain in force until a decision is passed.
Final Disposition
Ext.P19 set aside; matter remanded for fresh consideration with Ext.P20 in view; hearing to be provided to the petitioner and respondents 3-5; fresh order to be passed within two months; interim order in WP(C) 8247 to continue until decision.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • M/S Ceeyen Stone Crusher
  • Vinayan V.K

Respondents

  • State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA Kerala)
  • State Expert Appraisal Committee
  • A.K. Joseph
  • Jimmy Alex
  • Vinayan V.K
  • The District Collector
  • Director Department of Mining & Geology
  • M/S Ceeyen Stone Crusher

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Philip J. Vettickattu
  • • Sajitha George
  • • Neenu Bernath
  • • P.B. Sahasranaman
  • • T.S. Harikumar
  • • Vishakha J.
  • • Sanand Ramakrishnan
  • • M.P. Sreekrishnan

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Philip J. Vettickattu
  • • Neenu Bernath
  • • Saju S. Dominic
  • • Sanand Ramakrishnan
  • • Deepa Narayanan
  • • M.P. Sreekrishnan

Case Synopsis & Summary

The Kerala High Court, Viju Abraham, J., delivered on 4 April 2024 in WP(C) Nos. 24184 of 2023 and 8247 of 2024, challenging Ext.P19 directions under environmental clearances for a quarry operated by Ceeyen Stone Crusher at Mundathadam, Kasaragod. The petitioners argued that they were not issued a show-cause notice and were not heard, relying on S.O. 637(E) (2014) and on Apex Court judgments (Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Ankita Sinha; Assistant Commissioner of State Tax v. Commercial Steel Ltd.) as well as Ajith Kumar v. State of Kerala. They contended Ext.P20, a site inspection report by the MoEF&CC’s IRO Bangalore, which reportedly favored the petitioners, was not considered in Ext.P19, despite being before the first respondent. The respondents urged that the remedy is to approach the NGT under Section 3(16)(5) of the NGT Act if aggrieved by Ext.P19. After hearing, the Court found that Ext.P19 did not adequately consider Ext.P20 and other grounds; it set Ext.P19 aside and directed the first respondent to reconsider the matter, taking Ext.P20 into account and granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and respondents 3 to 5, with a fresh decision to be issued within two months. Interim order in WP(C) 8247, dated 01.03.2024, remains in force until a decision is taken.

Provisions of Law Cited

S.O. 637(E) dated 28-02-2014S.O. 1807(E) dated 12-04-2022Section 3(16)(5) of the National Green Tribunal ActKMMCRKMMC Rule 2015

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contended Ext.P19 was issued without a show-cause notice or hearing. They relied on S.O.637(E) (2014) and on Supreme Court precedents (Ankita Sinha; Commercial Steel Ltd.; Ajith Kumar) to argue violation of natural justice and statutory norms. They pointed out Ext.P20 (IRO report, Bangalore) favorable to petitioners was before the first respondent but not considered in Ext.P19. They urged setting aside Ext.P19 and directing reconsideration after affording hearing, including extending consideration to Ext.P20, and that the remedy to approach the NGT be preserved if aggrieved by the fresh decision.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents argued Ext.P19 was a valid decision based on compliance and balancing environmental concerns, and that the petitioners could pursue relief via the NGT under Section 3(16)(5) of the NGT Act if aggrieved. They stated Ext.P20 was among the materials considered and that other grounds motivated the Ext.P19 decision. They maintained that the EC conditions were under scrutiny and that the authorities had acted in accordance with procedures; no deprivation of due process was demonstrated.

Cited Precedents (3)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Ankita Sinha2021 (6) KLT 133 (SC)Mentioned OnlyCited by petitioner; the High Court did not rely on its holding to dispose of the matter.
Assistant Commissioner of State Tax v. Commercial Steel Ltd.2021 (5) KLT Online 1142 (SC)Mentioned OnlyCited as authority by petitioner; no explicit adoption or rejection in the judgment.
Ajith Kumar v. State of Kerala2017 (3) KLT 58Mentioned OnlyCited in argument; not treated as binding precedent in the decision.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against WP(C) Nos. 24184 of 2023 & 8247 of 2024 and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** # **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM`** ``` THURSDAY, THE 4[TH] DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 15TH CHAITHRA, 1946 ``` # **`WP(C) NO. 24184 OF 2023`** ## **`PETITIONER:`** ``` M/S.CEEYEN STONE CRUSHER, AGED 66 YEARS MUNDATHADAM, PARAPPA P.O, KASARAGOD REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, SRI. C. NARAYANAN, PIN - 671533 BY ADVS. PHILIP J.VETTICKATTU SAJITHA GEORGE NEENU BERNATH ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** - **`1 STATE LEVEL ENVIRONMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AUTHORITY (SEIAA KERALA), REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY, 4 TH FLOOR, KSRTC BUS TERMINAL COMPLEX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001`** - **`2 STATE EXPERT APPRAISAL COMMITTEE, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN 4 TH FLOOR, KSRTC BUS TERMINAL COMPLEX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001`** - **`3 A.K.JOSEPH, S/O. KURIAKOSEM ARACKAL HOUSE, MUNDATHADAM, PARAPPA P.O., KASARAGOD, PIN - 671533`** - **`4 JIMMY ALEX, S/O. ALEX, MANJAKUNNEL, PARAPPA P.O., KASARAGOD, PIN - 671533`** - **`5 VINAYAN V.K, DISTRICT ENVIRONMENTAL SAMITHI, PARAPPA P.O., KASARAGOD, PIN - 671533 BY ADVS. SAHASRANAMAN PB T.S.HARIKUMAR(K/782/1989) SANAND RAMAKRISHNAN(K/2871/1999) SC – M.P.SREEKRISHNAN`** ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.04.2024, ALONG WITH WP(C).8247/2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` WP(C) Nos. 24184 of 2023 & 8247 of 2024 : 2 : ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM`** ``` THURSDAY, THE 4[TH] DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 15TH CHAITHRA, 1946 ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 8247 OF 2024 ``` ## **`PETITIONER:`** ``` VINAYAN V.K AGED 66 YEARS SARANATH, MANALIL, AJANUR.P.O.KASARAGOD, PIN - 671531 BY ADVS. P.B.SAHASRANAMAN T.S.HARIKUMAR VISHAKHA J. SANAND RAMAKRISHNAN ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** - **`1 STATE ENVIRONMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AUTHORITY- KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY, K.S.R.T.C. BUS TERMINAL COMPLEX, 4TH FLOOR, THAMPANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695001`** - **`2 THE DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF MINING & GEOLOGY, DIRECTORATE OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, KESAVADASAPURAM, PATTOM PALACE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695004`** - **`3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, VIDYANAGAR, KASARAGOD., PIN - 671123`** - **`4 M/S.CEEYEN STONE CRUSHER MUNDATHADAM, PERAPPA P.O., KASARAGOD. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER., PIN - 671533`** - **`BY ADVS. PHILIP J.VETTICKATTU NEENU BERNATH(K/000575/2013) SAJU S. DOMINIC(K/308/2005) SR.GP – DEEPA NARAYANAN`** - **`SC – M.P.SREEKRISHNAN`** ## **`THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON`** ``` 04.04.2024, ALONG WITH WP(C).24184/2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME ``` ``` DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` WP(C) Nos. 24184 of 2023 & 8247 of 2024 : 3 : ## **VIJU ABRAHAM , J. ============================ WP(C) Nos. 24184 of 2023 & 8247 of 2024 ============================ Dated this the 4[th] day of April, 2024** ## **J U D G M E N T** Ext.P19 is challenged in WP(C) No.24184 of 2023 whereby the following directions were issued: - “1. Mining and Geology Department shall take necessary action for the violation as per KMMCR. The Department shall also inquire about any illegal mining happened in the area, if any and take appropriate action for violation of KMMC Rule 2015. 2. The Mining and Geology Department shall take necessary action to implement the mine closure plan by the Project Proponent or take action to close the mine utilising the funds available under the District Mineral development fund. 3. The SEAC shall assess the environmental damages due to non-compliance with the EC conditions and suggest suitable penal measures for environmental damages. 4. The Legal Officer SEIAA, shall intimate the decision of the Authority to the Standing counsel, SEIAA to defend the CCC on priority through email. 5. The Project Proponent will not be eligible for extension as per S.O. 1807(E) dated 12-04-2022 since he failed to comply EC conditions and inform the District Geologist and Environmental Engineer, KSPCB, Kasargod for necessary action. WP(C) Nos. 24184 of 2023 & 8247 of 2024 : 4 : 6. The SEIAA Secretariat shall intimate the action taken by SEIAA to the petitioners of the WP(C) 15745 of 2020 (P) and WP(C) No. 12147/2020(P) through email on priority. 7. The decisions of the Authority shall be informed to the petitioners through email.” 2. The primary contention raised by the petitioner is that they were not given a show cause notice and not heard. Petitioner raised contentions relying on notification S.O. No.637 (E) dated 28.02.2014 and also on the judgments of the Apex Court in **Municipal Corporation of Gr.Mumbai v. Ankita Sinha [2021 (6) KLT 133 (SC)]** ; **Assistant Commissioner of State Tax v. Commercial Steel Ltd. [2021 (5) KLT Online 1142 (SC)]** and also the judgment of Division Bench of this Court in **Ajith Kumar v. State of Kerala [2017 (3) KLT 58]** . Petitioner submits that the Offices of IRO, Ministry of Environement, Forests and Climate Change, Bangalore has visited the project and has filed Ext.P20 report dated 01.11.2022. Even though the said report was in favour of the petitioner and the same was brought to the notice of the 1[st] respondent, the same was not referred to or considered while taking a decision as per Ext.P19. 3. The learned Counsel appearing for respondents 3 to 5 submits that remedy available to the petitioner is to approach the NGT by filing an appeal under Section 3 (16) (5) of the NGT Act, if they are aggrieved by Ext.P19 order. WP(C) Nos. 24184 of 2023 & 8247 of 2024 : 5 : 4. I have heard the rival contentions of both sides. 5. The specific assertion made by the petitioner is that Ext.P20 report submitted by the Offices of IRO, Ministry of Environement, Forest and Climate Change, Bangalore after conducting a site inspection was very much before the 1[st] respondent while taking Ext.P19 decision, but the same has not been referred to. The said aspect is not seriously refuted by the learned Counsel appearing for the 1[st] respondent also. A perusal of Ext.P12 communication would reveal that the said report was produced before the 1[st] respondent as Enclosure No.6. The learned Counsel for the 1[st] respondent would submit that there are other reasons stated for taking Ext.P19 decision impugned in this writ petition. 6. In view of the above facts and circumstances, I am of the view that the matter requires to be reconsidered by the 1[st] respondent and a fresh decision is to be taken after taking into consideration Ext.P20 report submitted by the IRO, Ministry of Environement, Forest and Climate Change, Bangalore. Accordingly Ext.P19 is set aside with a consequential direction to the 1[st] respondent to reconsider the matter also taking into consideration Ext.P20 report and after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and respondent Nos. 3 to 5, and a fresh decision shall WP(C) Nos. 24184 of 2023 & 8247 of 2024 : 6 : be taken within an outer limit of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. In WP(C) No.8247 of 2024, this Court has passed an interim order dated 01.03.2024, wherein a direction was issued to respondents 2 and 3 to see that the operation of the quarry run by the 4[th] respondent is stopped in view of the fact that the environmental clearance has been cancelled. Since various other reasons have also been stated for taking a decision as per Ext.P19, inspite of setting aside of Ext.P19 and directing reconsideration, the interim order granted on 01.03.2024 will remain in force till a decision is taken by the 1[st] respondent as directed above. Sd/- **VIJU ABRAHAM JUDGE** sbk/- WP(C) Nos. 24184 of 2023 & 8247 of 2024 : 7 : ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8247/2024`** ``` PETITIONER EXHIBITS ``` ``` Exhibit.P.1TRUE COPY OF THE EC GRANTED BY THE DISTRICT IMPACT .ASSESSMENT AUTHORITY, KASARAGOD, NO.A/6439/16/DEIAA, DATED 16-03-2017 TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT Exhibit.P.2TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE HIGH COURT IN W.P.(C)NO. 12147/2020, DATED 09-09-2020 Exhibit.P.3TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING 128TH MEETING OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 27TH AND 28TH JUNE, 2023 Exhibit.P.4TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN CON.CASE(C) NO. 16 OF 2023, DATED 16-08-2023 OF THIS HON'BLE HIGH COURT Exhibit.P.5TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE MEMORANDUM, F.NO.IA3- 22/11/2023-IA.III(E-208230), DATED 28-04-2023 ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT FORESTS AND CLIMATE CHANGE ``` WP(C) Nos. 24184 of 2023 & 8247 of 2024 : 8 : ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24184/2023`** ``` PETITIONER EXHIBITS ``` - `Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE GRANTED TO THE PETITIONER DATED 16- 3-2017` - `Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 10-3-2023 IN W.P.(C)NO.6931/2023` - `Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE QUARRYING LEASE ISSUED BY THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY DATED 9-82017, WHICH IS VALID UPTO 8-8-2029` - `Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE INTEGRATED CONSENT TO OPERATE DATED 21-3-2023, WHICH IS VALID UPTO 15-3-2028 ISSUED BY THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD` - `Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLOSIVES LICENSE ISSUED BY THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY DATED 10-2-2021, WHICH IS VALID UPTO 31-3-2026` - `Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE ISSUED BY THE LOCAL AUTHORITY VIZ. KINANUR - KARINTHALAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT DATED 1-4-2023, WHICH IS VALID UPTO 31-32024` - `Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 9- 9-2020 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P.(C) NO.12147/2020` - `Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 18-8-2020 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P.(C) NO.15745/2020` - `Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE MINUTES OR THE 108 TH MEETING HELD ON 22 ND AND 23 RD MARCH 2021 OF THE 1 ST RESPONDENT` - `Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10-12-2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1 ST RESPONDENT` - `Exhibit TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE MINUTES OF P11 THE 134 TH MEETING OF THE 2 ND RESPONDENT DATED 9TH TO 11TH NOVEMBER,2022` - `Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 6-12-2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1 ST RESPONDENT` - `Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE 141 ST MEETING HELD ON 11 TH TO 12 TH APRIL, 2023 OF THE 2 ND RESPONDENT` - `Exhibit P14 TRUE COPY OF THE POINT WISE COMPLIANCE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER ON 22-5-2023` - `Exhibit P15 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLIANCE REPORT DATED 10-052023 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT` - `Exhibit TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE MINUTES OF P16 THE 2 ND RESPONDENT IN ITS MEETING HELD ON 6 TH TO 8 TH JUNE, 2023, WHICH WAS UPLOADED/MADE AVAILABLE ON THE LATE NIGHT OF 27 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023` - `Exhibit P17 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION MAILED BY THE PETITIONER ON 28-6- 2023` - `Exhibit P18 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION MAILED BY THE PETITIONER ON 30-6-2023` WP(C) Nos. 24184 of 2023 & 8247 of 2024 : 9 : ``` Exhibit P19TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE MINUTES OF THE 128 TH MEETING OF THE 1 ST RESPONDENT WHICH HELD ON 27 TH AND 29 TH JUNE, 2023, Exhibit P20TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT, FOREST AND CLIMATE CHANGE INTEGRATED REGIONAL OFFICE BANGALORE BEARING NO.12.1/DEIAA/34/KER/896 DATED 01/11/2022 Exhibit P21TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT FURNISHED BY THE GEOLOGICAL SUVEY OF INDIA DATED NIL ``` ## `RESPONDENT ANNEXURES` ``` AnnexureA true copy of the Field Inspection report of the R1(a)inspection conducted on 23.06.2022 AnnexureA true copy of the 2nd filed inspection Report R1(b) ```